During the first week, the week of theme 1, I read the
two texts: Plato’s Theaetetus and the Preface to the second edition of Immanuel
Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. I must admit that reading these two texts was a
really had task for me, as I have never studied any philosophy before. I read
the texts but felt like I did not quite understand the full meaning of either
one of them, but thanks to the lecture and the seminar things became a bit clearer
to me.
During the lecture Johan mentioned sources of our
knowledge today, which are mostly based upon naturalism and scientism. This
made me reflect about the evolution of knowledge over the years which I think is
rather interesting. The general concept of empiricism is something that I really
believe in and agree with, and as far as I can see it is the most logical way
of obtaining information about the environment and the world we live in. Now
this is sort of the opposite of what we talked about during the seminar. Much
of the time during the seminar was spent talking about a priori knowledge,
which is a concept I had a hard time grasping.
To sum up the week, I have gained a lot of new insight
and knowledge about subjects which I was not very familiar with earlier. I have
also improved my ability to see things from a different perspective, which is
quite necessary, considering the different style of this course compared to the
more traditional ones.
Hi Johan! I also had a very difficult time to understand the text. I guess it is because they are so different from earlier material that we have read as engineering students on KTH. However, even though they were really hard, I can in hindsight understand that they were useful for us to read. It opens our perspective and forces us to realise that there is other ways to see the world - not only scientific or technological.
SvaraRaderaGood reflection,
/Stephanie